Clinical outcomes by nephrectomy status in METEOR, a randomized phase 3 trial of cabozantinib (cabo) vs everolimus (eve) in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4570-4570
Author(s):  
Nizar M. Tannir ◽  
Thomas Powles ◽  
Bernard J. Escudier ◽  
Frede Donskov ◽  
Viktor Grünwald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Group ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Palliative Therapy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Grade ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

4570 Background: Most pts with advanced RCC undergo nephrectomy (Nx) as curative or palliative therapy. In a retrospective analysis of pts treated with targeted therapy, pts who were older and had more comorbidities and higher tumor grade were less likely to have had Nx. Pts without Nx had shorter overall survival (OS) than pts with Nx (Hanna, J Clin Oncol 2016). Here we report outcomes for cabo vs eve in pts with advanced RCC with or without prior Nx in the phase 3 METEOR trial (NCT01865747). Methods: 658 pts with clear cell RCC and ≥1 prior VEGFR TKI were randomized 1:1 to receive cabo at 60 mg qd or eve at 10 mg qd. Stratification was by MSKCC risk group and number of prior VEGFR TKIs. Endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and objective response rate (ORR). Results: 85% of enrolled pts had prior Nx of which 7% were partial; 15% had no prior nephrectomy (NoNx). Baseline characteristics, including Karnofsky performance status (KPS), MSKCC risk group, time from diagnosis to randomization, and median sum of diameters (SoD) for tumor target lesions, were less favorable for the NoNx subgroup (Table). Improved PFS and OS with cabo vs eve were observed regardless of Nx status. For the Nx subgroup, the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.51 (95% CI 0.41-0.64) for PFS and 0.66 (95% CI 0.52-0.84) for OS; for the NoNx subgroup, the HR was 0.51 (95% CI 0.30-0.86) for PFS and 0.75 (95% CI 0.44-1.27) for OS. Median OS was longer in the Nx subgroup for both treatment arms (Table). ORR per independent radiology committee (IRC) for cabo vs eve was 17% vs 4% for Nx and 21% vs 2% for NoNx. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events for both subgroups were generally consistent with the safety profiles of cabo and eve in the overall population. Conclusions: Cabo improved PFS, ORR, and OS compared with eve in pts with advanced RCC irrespective of nephrectomy status. Clinical trial information: NCT01865747. [Table: see text]

A randomized phase II trial comparing different schedules of nab-paclitaxel (nabP) combined with gemcitabine (GEM) as first line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4100-4100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippa Corrie ◽  
Wendi Qian ◽  
Bristi Basu ◽  
Juan W. Valle ◽  
Stephen Falk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cytidine Deaminase ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Pancreatic Head ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Age Range

4100 Background: NabP+GEM chemotherapy improves survival compared with GEM monotherapy as treatment for mPDAC. A PDAC mouse model suggested that nabP potentiates GEM activity by reducing cytidine deaminase levels and scheduling may be critical to optimise clinical benefit. Methods: Patients (pts) were randomised to receive standard concomitant (CON) nabP+GEM or sequential (SEQ) administration, with nabP given 24 hours before GEM. After 6 cycles, pts benefiting from treatment could continue the same regimen until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1; secondary endpoints included safety, objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL). Serial blood and baseline tumour samples were collected for exploratory biomarkers. Results: Between March 2014 and 2016, 146 pts (71 SEQ, 75 CON) were recruited. Median age (range) was 66 (45-82) years; Karnofsky performance status was 70 (in 12% pts), 80 (27%), 90 (38%) or 100 (24%); 47% had pancreatic head primaries; 84% had liver metastases. Median no. cycles received was 4 SEQ, 3 CON; 51 pts (35%) received ≥6 cycles of treatment (42% SEQ, 28% CON). A 24+2hr interval was achieved in > 90% SEQ admin. Grade ≥3 adverse events experienced by ≥10% pts (SEQ, CON) were neutropaenia (54%, 30%; p = 0.003), febrile neutropaenia (12%, 12%), fatigue (22%, 15%), vomiting (7%, 11%) and anaemia (10%, 5%). G-CSF was administered at local investigator's discretion to 35 pts (23 SEQ, 12 CON; p = 0.015). To date, 112 pts have died. 6 month (m) PFS by SEQ and CON arms were 47% and 33%; median PFS were 5.8 and 4.0m; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.46-0.95; 12m OS by SEQ and CON arms were 29% and 26%; median OS were 10.1 and 7.9m; HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.61-1.29. ORR was 50% SEQ and 33% CON (p = 0.065). Mean baseline QoL Global health status score was 60.6 SEQ and 63.4 CON. The mean change in QoL score from baseline at 24 weeks was -2.1 SEQ and -12.1 CON. Conclusions: Sequential delivery of nabP combined with GEM trended towards improving all clinically relevant efficacy end points: PFS, OS, and ORR. Translational correlates will be reported in due course. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN71070888.

A randomized phase II study of axitinib in combination with pemetrexed/cisplatin (pem/cis) as first-line therapy for nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7551-7551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chandra Prakash Belani ◽  
Nobuyuki Yamamoto ◽  
Igor Bondarenko ◽  
Sergey V Orlov ◽  
Jie Tang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Starting Dose ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

7551 Background: Axitinib is a potent and selective second-generation inhibitor of VEGF receptors 1, 2, and 3 that has promising single-agent activity in advanced NSCLC. Efficacy and safety of axitinib (in 2 dosing schedules) combined with pem/ciswere evaluatedfor non-squamous NSCLC. Methods: Patients with confirmed stage IIIB, IV, or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC and ECOG performance status (PS) 0 or 1 were stratified by gender and PS, and randomized 1:1:1 to receive six 21-day cycles of axitinib continuously plus pem/cis (arm I); axitinib on Days 2 through 19 followed by a 3-day interruption plus pem/cis (arm II); or pem/cis alone (arm III). Axitinib was administered at a starting dose of 5 mg BID. Pem/cis (500/75 mg/m2) was infused on Day 1 of each cycle. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Baseline characteristics of patients in arm I (n=55), arm II (n=58), or arm III (n=57) ranged between 59–62 yr median age; 62–65% male; 71–85% White; 73–85% current/ex-smokers; and 43–47% PS 0. There were no significant differences in PFS or overall survival (OS) between axitinib-containing arms I and II compared with pem/cis alone, but objective response rates (ORR) were higher (Table). Most common all causality grade 3 adverse events (AEs) in arm I, II, and III, respectively, were hypertension (20%, 17%, 0%); neutropenia (18%, 10%, 9%); nausea (16%, 5%, 7%); vomiting (13%, 5%, 4%); fatigue (11%,16%,16%); and anemia (7%, 14%, 9%). Grade 4 AEs observed in >1 patient were asthenia and pulmonary embolism (2 patients each in arm II). Conclusions: Axitinib combined with pem/cis was generally well tolerated, but efficacy was not significantly better than pem/cis alone in non-squamous NSCLC. [Table: see text]

First-line nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) plus two cycles of chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo alone (4 cycles) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Two-year update from CheckMate 9LA.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9000-9000
Author(s):  
Martin Reck ◽  
Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu ◽  
Manuel Cobo ◽  
Michael Schenker ◽  
Bogdan Zurawski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Expression Level ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Grade 3

9000 Background: In the randomized phase 3 CheckMate 9LA trial (NCT03215706), first-line NIVO + IPI combined with 2 cycles of chemo significantly improved overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs chemo alone (4 cycles). Clinical benefit was observed regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression level and histology. Here we report data with 2 years’ minimum follow-up from this study. Methods: Adult patients (pts) with stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, ECOG performance status ≤ 1, and no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were stratified by PD-L1 (< 1% vs ≥ 1%), sex, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous) and were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 360 mg Q3W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W + chemo (2 cycles; n = 361) or chemo alone (4 cycles; n = 358). Pts with non-squamous NSCLC in the chemo-alone arm could receive pemetrexed maintenance. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included PFS and ORR by blinded independent central review, and efficacy by different PD-L1 levels. Safety was exploratory. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 24.4 months for OS (database lock: Feb 18, 2021), pts treated with NIVO + IPI + chemo continued to derive OS benefit vs chemo, with a median OS of 15.8 months vs 11.0 months, respectively (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.61–0.86]); 2-year OS rates were 38% vs 26%. Median PFS with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was 6.7 months vs 5.3 months (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56–0.79]); 8% and 37% of pts who had disease progression received subsequent immunotherapy, respectively. ORR was 38% with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs 25% with chemo. Similar clinical benefit with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was observed in all randomized pts and across the majority of subgroups, including by PD-L1 expression level (Table) or histology. Any grade and grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 92% and 48% of pts in the NIVO + IPI + chemo arm vs 88% and 38% in the chemo arm, respectively. Conclusion: With 2 years’ minimum follow-up, first-line NIVO + IPI + chemo demonstrated durable survival and benefit versus chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC; no new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706. [Table: see text]

Association of statins and nivolumab activity in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Results from the phase II nivoren—GETUG AFU 26 trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 359-359
Author(s):  
Emeline Colomba ◽  
Ronan Flippot ◽  
Cécile Dalban ◽  
Sylvie Negrier ◽  
Christine Chevreau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Immune Modulation ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Metabolic Reprogramming ◽  
Oncogenic Signaling ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
The Impact

359 Background: Statins are HMG-CoA inhibitors that regulate several mechanisms involved in tumor growth, including mitochondrial metabolism, activation of oncogenic signaling pathways, and immune modulation. Population-based studies showed that statin intake may be negatively associated with RCC onset. The impact of statins on response to immunotherapy in mRCC is unknown. Herein we study the association between statin administration and outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab in the NIVOREN-GETUG AFU 26 phase II trial (NCT03013335). Methods: Patients with mRCC who failed previous VEGFR inhibitors were included. We assessed nivolumab activity, including objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) according to statin intake at baseline. Toxicity was assessed using CTCAE v4.0. Results: Overall,133 patients were treated with statins at baseline among 702 evaluable for concomitant therapies (19%). Among them, median age was 68 (49-90), 84% were male, 85% had a performance status ≥ 80%, 42% were overweight and 20% obese. Patients treated with statins had mostly good (23%) or intermediate (58%) IMDC risk, 64% had grade 3 or 4 tumors, and nivolumab was given in a third line setting or more in 55%. Median follow-up was 23.9 months (95%CI 23.0-24.5) in the overall cohort. The ORR was 26% in patients treated with statins, PFS 5.0 months (CI95% 3.0 – 5.5), OS 27.9 months (CI95% 19.4-30.3). Outcomes of patients with or without statins did not differ significantly. Similar rates of grade 3-5 TRAE were reported in patients with (20%) or without (18%) statin intake. Conclusions: This is the first study to evaluate statin intake and outcomes with nivolumab in patients with mRCC. Despite numerically higher ORR, statins were not significantly associated with improved outcomes. These data require other analyzes considering other factors such as BMI and other comorbidities. Further studies may help better understand the interplay between immunity and metabolic reprogramming in RCC.

Assessment of sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus treatment of physician’s choice (TPC) cohort by agent in the phase 3 ASCENT study of patients (pts) with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1077-1077
Author(s):  
Joyce O'Shaughnessy ◽  
Kevin Punie ◽  
Mafalda Oliveira ◽  
Filipa Lynce ◽  
Sara M. Tolaney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Antibody Drug Conjugate ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Chemotherapy Agent ◽  
Recist 1.1 ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

1077 Background: In pts with pretreated mTNBC, standard-of-care chemotherapy is associated with low objective response rates (ORRs) and short median progression-free survival (PFS). SG is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an anti–Trop-2 antibody coupled to the cytotoxic SN-38 payload via a proprietary, hydrolyzable linker. SG received accelerated FDA approval for treatment of pts with mTNBC who have received ≥2 prior therapies for metastatic disease. The confirmatory phase 3 ASCENT study (NCT02574455) in pts with relapsed/refractory mTNBC demonstrated a significant survival benefit of SG over TPC (median PFS: 5.6 vs 1.7 mo, HR 0.41, P< 0.0001; median overall survival [OS]: 12.1 vs 6.7 mo, HR 0.48, P< 0.0001) with a tolerable safety profile. Here we summarize efficacy results for SG vs each TPC agent in ASCENT to examine how each TPC agent performed individually. Methods: Pts had mTNBC refractory to or progressing after ≥2 prior standard chemotherapy regimens. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive SG (10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1 and 8, every 21 days) or single-agent TPC (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine). Primary endpoint was PFS per RECIST 1.1 by independent review in brain metastases-negative (BMNeg) pts. Secondary endpoints were ORR per RECIST 1.1, duration of response, OS, and safety. Outcomes for each of the agents in the TPC arm were analyzed and compared with SG. Results: Of 529 pts enrolled, 468 were BMNeg. Among pts in the TPC cohort (n = 233), eribulin was the most commonly chosen chemotherapy (n = 126), followed by vinorelbine (n = 47), capecitabine (n = 31), and gemcitabine (n = 29). Treatment with eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, and gemcitabine resulted in shorter median PFS vs SG (2.1, 1.6, 1.6, and 2.7 vs 5.6 mo, respectively); similar results were observed for median OS (6.9, 5.9, 5.2, and 8.4 vs 12.1 mo), ORR (5%, 4%, 6%, and 3% vs 35%), and clinical benefit rate (CBR; 8%, 6%, 10%, and 14% vs 45%). Key grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) with TPC overall vs SG included neutropenia (33% vs 51%), leukopenia (5% vs 10%), fatigue (5% vs 3%), and anemia (5% vs 8%). Key grade ≥3 TRAEs with eribulin vs SG included neutropenia (30% vs 51%), leukopenia (5% vs 10%), fatigue (5% vs 3%), anemia (2% vs 8%), and peripheral neuropathy (2% vs none), respectively. The safety profiles of vinorelbine, capecitabine, and gemcitabine combined were consistent with that of TPC overall and with eribulin. One treatment-related death was reported for the TPC arm (eribulin) and none with SG. Conclusions: The efficacy benefit observed with SG vs TPC in pts with mTNBC was retained when evaluating each TPC chemotherapy agent individually. These results confirm that SG should be considered as a new standard of care in pts with pretreated mTNBC. Clinical trial information: NCT02574455 .

Safety and efficacy outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and low Karnofsky performance status: Results from the CheckMate 920 trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 315-315
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Hutson ◽  
Bradley Curtis Carthon ◽  
Jeffrey Yorio ◽  
Sunil Babu ◽  
Heidi Ann McKean ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Grade 3

315 Background: Combination therapy with nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) has demonstrated long-term efficacy and tolerability for patients (pts) with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Most pivotal clinical trials in pts with aRCC have excluded pts with low Karnofsky performance status (KPS; < 70%). CheckMate 920 is a multi-arm, phase IIIb/IV, open-label clinical trial of NIVO+IPI treatment in pts enrolled in a community practice setting with aRCC and a high unmet medical need. We present safety and efficacy results for the cohort of pts with aRCC of any histology and KPS 50%–60% from CheckMate 920 (NCT02982954). Methods: Pts with previously untreated advanced/metastatic RCC and KPS 50%–60% received NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W × 4 doses followed by 480 mg NIVO Q4W for ≤ 2 years or until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was incidence of grade ≥ 3 immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) within 100 days of last dose of study drug. Key secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1 (both per investigator). Exploratory endpoints included overall survival (OS). Results: Of 25 treated pts with KPS 50%–60%, 76% were men; median age was 67 years (range, 34–81). IMDC risk was favorable in 0%, intermediate in 32%, and poor in 68% of pts; 84% had clear cell and 16% had non-clear cell RCC histology. With a minimum follow-up of 25 months, median duration of therapy (95% CI) was 2.3 months (2.1–7.7) for NIVO and 2.1 months (2.1–2.1) for IPI. The median number of doses (range) received was 4 (1–27) for NIVO and 4 (1–4) for IPI; 76% of pts received ≥ 4 NIVO doses and 68% received all 4 IPI doses. The only grade 3–4 imAEs by category were hepatitis (4.0%) and adrenal insufficiency (4.0%). No grade 5 imAEs occurred. Overall, 4 (16%) pts discontinued due to any-grade adverse events (n = 1 each for elevated AST, malignant neoplasm progression, back pain, and acetabulum fracture). Of 18 evaluable pts, ORR was 33.3% (95% CI, 13.3–59.0); no pts had a complete response and 6 had partial response. Median time to objective response was 4.5 months (range, 2.5–24.7). Median duration of objective response was 20.6 months (range, 0.03+–24.2+). Median PFS was 4.6 months (95% CI, 2.5–14.8). Median OS was 15.6 months (95% CI, 5.3–25.1). Conclusions: NIVO+IPI demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and promising antitumor activity in pts with previously untreated aRCC and KPS 50%–60%. The combination was tolerated at a dose intensity similar to that observed in clinical trials conducted in pts with higher KPS (≥ 70%). These data support the value of NIVO+IPI in pts who may not be considered ideal candidates for this therapy and consequently may have limited treatment options. Clinical trial information: NCT02982954 .

Crossover and rechallenge with pembrolizumab in recurrent patients from the EORTC 1325-MG/Keynote-054 phase 3 trial, pembrolizumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9500-9500
Author(s):  
Alexander M. Eggermont ◽  
Andrey Meshcheryakov ◽  
Victoria Atkinson ◽  
Christian U. Blank ◽  
Mario Mandalà ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Progression ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Complete Resection ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

9500 Background: The phase 3 double-blind EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 trial evaluated pembrolizumab (pembro) vs placebo in stage III cutaneous melanoma patients (pts) with complete resection of lymph nodes. Pembro improved RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57) and DMFS (HR 0.60) (Eggermont, NEJM 2018, TLO 2021). In the pembro group, the incidence of immune related AE (irAE) grade 1-5 was 37%, and of grade 3-5 was 7%. We present the safety profile, response rate and PFS for the subset of pts who had a recurrence and crossed over or were rechallenged with pembrolizumab, within protocol. Methods: Pts were randomized to receive iv. pembro 200 mg (N=514) or placebo (N=505) every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses (~1 year). Upon recurrence with no brain metastases, pts with an ECOG PS 0-2 were eligible to enter part 2 of the study, i.e. to receive pembro 200 mg iv. every 3 weeks for a maximum of 2 years, for crossover (those who received placebo) or rechallenge (those who recurred ≥6 months after completing one year of pembro therapy). Treatment was stopped in case of disease progression (RECIST 1.1) or unacceptable toxicity. Results: At the clinical cut-off (16-Oct-2020), 298 (59%) pts had a disease recurrence in the placebo group; 155 pts participated in the crossover part 2 of the trial. A total of 297 (58%) pts completed the 1-yr pembro adjuvant treatment, of whom 47 had a recurrence ≥6 mths from the stop of treatment and 20 entered in the rechallenge part of the trial. Among 175 pts who started pembro in Part 2, 160 discontinued due to completion of therapy (N=24), disease progression (N=88), toxicity (N=20), investigator's decision (N=21), or other reason (N=7); 15 pts were still on-treatment. Results for the 2 groups are provided in the table. The median number of doses was 12 and 5.5, respectively (resp), and the median follow-up was 41 and 19 mts, resp. Among the 175 pts, 51 (29%) had a grade 1-4 irAE (by group: 47 [30%] and 4 [20%] resp) and 11 (6%) a grade 3-4 irAE. Conclusions: Pembrolizumab treatment after crossover yielded a 39% ORR in evaluable pts and an overall 3-yr PFS of ̃32%, but after rechallenge the efficacy was lower. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA The median PFS (95% CI) from start of Part 2 was 14 (5-27) and 8 (5-15) mts for stage III-resected and III/IV various, resp. Among the 80 stage IV crossover pts with evaluable disease, 31 (39%) had an objective response: 14 (18%) CR, 17 (21%) PR. The 2-yr PFS rate from response was 69% (95% CI 48-83%). For these 80 pts, the median PFS was 6.1 mts and the 3-yr PFS rate was 31% (95% CI 21-41%). Among 9 stage IV rechallenged pts with an evaluable disease, 1 (11%) reached CR, 3 had SD and 5 PD. Clinical trial information: NCT02362594. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Survival benefits of hypofractionated radiotherapy combined with temozolomide or temozolomide plus bevacizumab in elderly patients with glioblastoma aged ≥ 75 years

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Makoto Ohno ◽  
Yasuji Miyakita ◽  
Masamichi Takahashi ◽  
Hiroshi Igaki ◽  
Yuko Matsushita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Dna Methyltransferase ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Methylation Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Promoter Hypermethylation ◽  
Hypofractionated Radiotherapy ◽  
Methylguanine Dna Methyltransferase ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background and purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of elderly patients (aged ≥75 years) with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM), who were treated with hypofractionated radiotherapy comprising 45 Gy in 15 fractions combined with temozolomide (TMZ) or TMZ and bevacizumab (TMZ/Bev). Materials and methods Between October 2007 and August 2018, 30 patients with GBM aged ≥75 years were treated with hypofractionated radiotherapy consisting of 45 Gy in 15 fractions. Twenty patients received TMZ and 10 received TMZ/Bev as upfront chemotherapy. O-6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status was analyzed by pyrosequencing. The cutoff value of the mean level of methylation at the 16 CpG sites was 16%. Results Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 12.9 months and 9.9 months, respectively. The 1-year OS and PFS rates were 64.7 and 34.7%, respectively. Median OS and PFS did not differ significantly between patients with MGMT promoter hypermethylation (N = 11) and those with hypomethylation (N = 16) (17.4 vs. 11.8 months, p = 0.32; and 13.1 vs. 7.3 months, p = 0.11, respectively). The median OS and PFS were not significantly different between TMZ (N = 20) and TMZ/Bev (N = 10) chemotherapy (median OS: TMZ 12.9 months vs. TMZ/Bev 14.6 months, p = 0.93, median PFS: TMZ 8.5 months vs TMZ/Bev 10.0 months, p = 0.64, respectively). The median time until Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score decreasing below 60 points was 7.9 months. The best radiological responses included 11 patients with a partial response (36.7%). Grade 3/4 toxicities included leukopenia in 15 patients (50%), anorexia in 4 (13.3%), and hyponatremia during concomitant chemotherapy in 3 (10%). Conclusion Our hypofractionated radiotherapy regimen combined with TMZ or TMZ/Bev showed benefits in terms of OS, PFS, and KPS maintenance with acceptable toxicities in elderly patients with GBM aged ≥75 years.

Vandetanib versus erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of at least one prior cytotoxic chemotherapy: A randomized, double-blind phase III trial (ZEST)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8009-8009
Author(s):  
R. B. Natale ◽  
S. Thongprasert ◽  
F. A. Greco ◽  
M. Thomas ◽  
C. M. Tsai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Equivalent Efficacy ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

8009 Background: Vandetanib is a once-daily oral inhibitor of VEGFR, EGFR and RET signaling. This phase III study compared the efficacy of vandetanib vs erlotinib in patients (pts) with advanced, previously treated NSCLC. Methods: Eligible pts (stage IIIB/IV NSCLC, PS 0–2, 1–2 prior chemotherapies; all histologies permitted) were randomized 1:1 to receive vandetanib 300 mg/day or erlotinib 150 mg/day until progression/toxicity. The primary objective was to show superiority in progression-free survival (PFS) for vandetanib vs erlotinib. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), time to deterioration of symptoms (TDS; EORTC QoL Questionnaire) and safety. Results: Between Oct 06-Nov 07, 1240 pts (mean age 61 yrs; 38% female; 22% squamous) were randomized to receive vandetanib (n=623) or erlotinib (n=617). Baseline characteristics were similar in both arms. Median duration of follow-up was 14 months, with 88% pts progressed and 67% dead. There was no difference in PFS for pts treated with vandetanib vs erlotinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98, 95.22% CI 0.87–1.10; P=0.721), and no difference in the secondary endpoints of OS (HR 1.01, 95.08% CI 0.89–1.16; P=0.830), ORR (both 12%) and TDS (pain: HR 0.92, P=0.289; dyspnea: HR 1.07, P=0.407; cough: HR 0.94, P=0.455). A preplanned non-inferiority analysis for PFS and OS demonstrated equivalent efficacy for vandetanib and erlotinib. The adverse events (AEs) observed for vandetanib were generally consistent with previous NSCLC studies with vandetanib 300 mg. There was a higher incidence of some AEs (any grade) with vandetanib vs erlotinib, including diarrhea (50% vs 38%) and hypertension (16% vs 2%); rash was more frequent with erlotinib (38% vs 28%). The overall incidence of CTCAE grade ≥3 AEs was also higher with vandetanib (50% vs 40%). The incidence of protocol-defined QTc prolongation in the vandetanib arm was 5%. Conclusions: The study did not meet its primary objective of demonstrating PFS prolongation with vandetanib vs erlotinib in pts with previously treated advanced NSCLC. However, vandetanib and erlotinib showed equivalent efficacy for PFS and OS in a preplanned non-inferiority analysis. [Table: see text]

Phase II study of pemetrexed (Pem) and cisplatin (Cis) plus cetuximab (Cet) followed by Pem and Cet maintenance therapy in patients (Pts) with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7554-7554
Author(s):  
Gerald Schmid-Bindert ◽  
Vittorio Gebbia ◽  
Frank Mayer ◽  
Edurne Arriola ◽  
Diego Marquez-Medina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Rate ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
One Year

7554 Background: A prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study was conducted to assess the effect of adding cet to pem and cis in pts with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Methods: 113 Caucasian performance status 0-1 pts received 1st line pem (500 mg/m2) and cis (75 mg/m2) on day 1 (21d cycle) for 4-6 cycles and cet (400 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2) weekly. Non-progressive pts received pem 500 mg/m2 on day 1 (21d cycle) plus cet (250mg/m2 weekly) until progression. Pts received vitamin B12/folic acid and dexamethasone. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) (RECIST 1.0). Secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS), 1 year survival rate, translational research (TR) and safety. Results: Pts’ characteristics: median age 59.7 years, 64% male, 50% PS 0, 92% stage IV, and 78% adenocarcinoma. All pts completed ≥ 1 cycle of induction therapy and 45% and 43% completed ≥ 1 cycle of maintenance with pem and cet, respectively. ORR (n=109) was 38.5% (80% CI 32.2-45.1), all partial responses. Disease control rate (response/stable disease) was 59.6% (80% CI: 53.1-65.9). Median PFS was 5.82 months (80% CI: 4.40-6.70). One year survival rate was 0.45 (80% CI: 0.39-0.51). Significant associations were seen between high EGFR by IHC and increased PFS (cytoplasm: HR=0.46, p=0.035; membrane: HR=0.41, p=0.008), and between high nuclear TTF-1 and increased ORR (OR=7.73, p=0.021) / PFS (HR=0.21, p<0.001) / OS (HR=0.25, p=0.035). Of 113 pts evaluated for safety, 73 (64.6%) pts had drug related CTC Grade 3/4 adverse events (AE): most frequent were neutropenia (14.2%), rash (15%), and vomiting (8.8%). Drug related serious AEs were reported in 27.4% pts: most frequent were anemia (5.3%), neutropenia (5.3%), vomiting (3.5%), and rash, renal failure, diarrhea and fatigue (1.8% each). There were 2 potential on-study drug related deaths (sudden death and large intestinal perforation). Conclusions: Pem, cis and cet appeared efficacious and tolerable. These results support further evaluation in a randomized trial. The TR outcomes are hypothesis generating given the study’s size and nonrandomized nature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document